APHC010620732025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3521]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11978/2025 Between:

Chukka Appalaraju and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)

AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):

1. J RAVI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following:

ORDER:

Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 on bail in Crime No.234 of 2025 of Anandapuram Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionaerate, registered against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 herein for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’).

2. Sri J. Ravi Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners are innocent and have not committed any offence. They have been falsely implicated in this case due to animosity between the petitioners and the de-facto complainant and her uncle. The petitioners are willing to abide by any conditions that this Court deems fit for granting bail. It is further submitted that the petitioners had no intention to cause the death of the victim. The learned counsel also submits that the petitioners have been in judicial custody for the past 64 days. The petitioners have got fixed abode, they may not evade from the process of law and it is urged to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

3. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, submits that L.W.1 sustained simple injuries, while L.W.10 suffered grievous injuries at the hands of the petitioners. Both are direct eyewitnesses to the occurrence. There are specific overt acts reported against the petitioners, and the attack is of a very serious nature. The investigation is still at a progressive stage and it is urged to dismiss the petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.

5. On perusal of the record, the allegations against the petitioners are severe in nature. They have attacked the de-facto complainant with a knife. When the uncle of the de-facto complainant tried to rescue the de-facto complainant the petitioners attacked him with a knife on his left cheek and neck. Consequently the uncle of the de-facto complainant sustained severe bleeding injuries on his left cheek and neck. The record further discloses that because of the injury to the neck for same days, the uncle of the de-facto complainant could not give his statement to the police. So far, only ten witnesses are examined. L.Ws.2 and 8 are the direct eye-witnesses, who rescued L.Ws.1 and 10. They supported the version of the de-facto complainant and his uncle. The petitioners were arrested on 06.10.2025. They have been in the judicial custody for the past 64 days only. Investigation is at crucial stage. Therefore the request for enlarging the petitioners on bail at this point of time is not found convincing and reasonable. 7. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

_________________________

DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 09.12.2025

KMS

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11978 of 2025

Date: 09.12.2025

KMS